Is There Any Reason I Couldn't Open A Restaurant That Serves Human Meat?

I suspect that there are plenty of people out there who are curious about what it would be like to eat another person's flesh. I also believe that many of these individuals would be willing to pay exorbitant prices for the opportunity to do so.

Furthermore, I think that there are many people who would like to be consumed- perhaps not killed in order to be consumed, but have their remains eaten by others upon their demise. Plus, there's the whole recycling thing.

Would there be anything illegal about someone rounding up volunteers who, upon death, would be willing to donate their bodies for the purpose of being cooked and served to others as food? Would it be feasible??

I know it isn't safe to serve human brains, but would the rest safe to eat, assuming that it has been properly prepared?

Could Surreal start up a cruise ship line, and serve us these delicacies out in international waters? I imagine pirate meat would be a bit tough though.

Just like the sexual exploitation of children off-shore, I recon the various countries' legislatures would be tripping over themselves to pass extra-territorial legislation so fast that the cops would be waiting at the pier when the very first boatload of customers returned. You'd be in jail before the ink was dry.

There was, what I assume to have been an urban legend, about a restuarant somewhere in the far east that served "long pig". This was circulating in the 40's and 50's, but I haven't heard about it in years.
It was supposed to be very exclusive, by invitation only, and very, very, expensive.
I even have a recollection of reading a reference to it in a novel, although I can't remember the name of the book.

I once read about people who have an over-powering desire to have have pieces of themselves amputated. There's a proper scientific / medical name for the condition but I can't find any info on it now.

Apotemnophilia, or Body Integrity Identity Disorder. There was a story on "Untold Stories of the ER" where a guy came in who had amputated his own hand. He kept insisting that they just fix the stump and that he would just cut it off again if they didn't. They had an ethics committee meeting and decided that abiding by the man's wishes was the way to go, as much as it was hard for them not to try to reattach the hand.

Apotemnophilia, or Body Integrity Identity Disorder. There was a story on "Untold Stories of the ER" where a guy came in who had amputated his own hand. He kept insisting that they just fix the stump and that he would just cut it off again if they didn't. They had an ethics committee meeting and decided that abiding by the man's wishes was the way to go, as much as it was hard for them not to try to reattach the hand.

I suspect that there are plenty of people out there who are curious about what it would be like to eat another person's flesh. I also believe that many of these individuals would be willing to pay exorbitant prices for the opportunity to do so.

Originally Posted by gigi
Apotemnophilia, or Body Integrity Identity Disorder. There was a story on "Untold Stories of the ER" where a guy came in who had amputated his own hand. He kept insisting that they just fix the stump and that he would just cut it off again if they didn't. They had an ethics committee meeting and decided that abiding by the man's wishes was the way to go, as much as it was hard for them not to try to reattach the hand.

Originally Posted by Terminus Est
Did he get DORRANCE #5X STAINLESS STEEL HOOKS?

There was, what I assume to have been an urban legend, about a restuarant somewhere in the far east that served "long pig". This was circulating in the 40's and 50's, but I haven't heard about it in years.
It was supposed to be very exclusive, by invitation only, and very, very, expensive.
I even have a recollection of reading a reference to it in a novel, although I can't remember the name of the book.

You'd probably have to roast the pirate meat and sell it at Arrrrrrrrrby's.

<snorf>

Personally, I think being able to donate my body to the stew pot is an excellent choice!

Until then, maybe I will start a Human Ranch and do a study on Perservative-free range 'cattle' ( organics and the like) vs the fast food seditary life style. I bet I could get this half subsidized by McDonalds.

Cutting out a lot of biological complexity: because the body has trouble processing proteins that are too similar to its own, and the proteins wind up "misfolding". Strange, but true. The difficulty of processing too-similar proteins has led to the present problem of BSE, or "mad cow disease" (although I prefer calling it "bovine spongiform encephalopathy", because it's so darn fun to say "spongiform").

<Why is cannibalism an unwise evolutionary choice>
Cutting out a lot of biological complexity: because the body has trouble processing proteins that are too similar to its own, and the proteins wind up "misfolding". Strange, but true. The difficulty of processing too-similar proteins has led to the present problem of BSE, or "mad cow disease" (although I prefer calling it "bovine spongiform encephalopathy", because it's so darn fun to say "spongiform").

I'm not sure that makes a lot of sense; virtually every protein in a cow is also present in humans, and vice versa. It's possible there would be issues with parasites and diseases being better transmitted by cannibalism, especially with larger more complex animals.

However, putting aside the problems with implied intelligence in using words like 'wise evolutionary choice', cannibalism is not an adaptive strategy in the long term because an individual would almost always be better off just skipping a link in the food chain and eating the food that the cannibalism prey would have eaten.

Which isn't to say that occasional cannibalism isn't adaptive (and is common among insects, for instance), just that the most adaptive strategy is to kill and eat your rivals, then spend the rest of the time eating their food.

Slight highjack. For anyone curious about "taste cannibalism" I recommend the book "Stiff" . The author looks into the various ways dead human bodies are disposed of and/or used. There is a chapter where she investigates a story about a crematory employee in China who took human flesh, made food from it, and then sold it.

The whole book is great, but you guys may get a lot out of the cannibalism chapter.

Would it be any different if you opened a restaurant where people could, after signing various waivers, consume their own flesh?

I'm pretty sure that this would be an unconscionable contract, at the very least. (At least that was the first thing that popped in my head). So, that would violate the agreement and waivers. If the victim (for lack of a better word) lived, I'm pretty sure aggravated battery would be a slam dunk charge. I'm not sure what else the cannibal would be charged with, assuming no legislation against consuming human flesh. If the victim died, then it'll probably be voluntary manslaughter. Of course, finally, no thread on cannibalism can be complete without reference to Armin Meiwes. (That dude just looks like a cannibal.)

Could Surreal culture human tissue in vats and serve that instead of getting his tissue from ex-humans?

I'm not sure why this is, but I actually find this idea grosser than cannibalism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by devilsknew

Cannibalism is an unwise evolutionary choice.

In his book Good to Eat, Martin Harris, an anthropologist, makes a pretty good argument to explain why cannibalism is a reasonable choice in areas where human diets are extremely poor in protein, though not a good choice elsewhere.

Unfortunately, I forget the specifics (sigh) so I'll just have to recommend you read it . . .

...the body has trouble processing proteins that are too similar to its own, and the proteins wind up "misfolding".

Is there any evidence to support this claim? Why would proteins similar to our own be more resistant to hydrochloric acid or trypsin? How could they be?

Quote:

The difficulty of processing too-similar proteins has led to the present problem of BSE, or "mad cow disease"....

Once again, is there any evidence at all to suport such a claim?

Isn't BSE simply a prion disease? And hasn't that prion jumped species at least twice, ie from scrapie in sheep to BSE in cattle to VCJD in humans. And if it has jumped species two times doesn't that priove that the problem has nothing to do with cannibalism or any inability to to process similar proteins?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quercus

...cannibalism is not an adaptive strategy in the long term because an individual would almost always be better off just skipping a link in the food chain and eating the food that the cannibalism prey would have eaten.

It's not that simple.

People can also eat almost any food that pigs. chickens or dogs can eat yet pigs, chickens and to a lesser extent dogs have a long history of domestication as food animals. The reason for that is that animals represent a protein and fat store. Because they can forage (or farm) independently of the person eating them they can concentrate energy from a wide area into a very protein and energy dense package. For example a person could eat truffles and acorns themselves but they would never gain much weight on such a diet. In contrast a herd of piglets can be set out to forage in an oak forest and they can then be slaughtered when they reach maturity.

People can be used in exactly the same manner, and occasionally have been. By putting a person to work foraging or farming you can get them to be self sufficient and grow indefinitely and then slaughter them after they have concentrated all that energy and protein in one dense package which you could never have done yourself.

People can also eat almost any food that pigs. chickens or dogs can eat yet pigs, chickens and to a lesser extent dogs have a long history of domestication as food animals. The reason for that is that animals represent a protein and fat store. Because they can forage (or farm) independently of the person eating them they can concentrate energy from a wide area into a very protein and energy dense package. For example a person could eat truffles and acorns themselves but they would never gain much weight on such a diet. In contrast a herd of piglets can be set out to forage in an oak forest and they can then be slaughtered when they reach maturity.

People can be used in exactly the same manner, and occasionally have been. By putting a person to work foraging or farming you can get them to be self sufficient and grow indefinitely and then slaughter them after they have concentrated all that energy and protein in one dense package which you could never have done yourself.

The fact that pigs largely rely on sources of food that are edible to humans has been advanced (again in Good to Eat) as a reason behind Muslim and Jewish strictures on eating pork; it's inefficient when food is fairly scarce and grazing animals could be used instead as a source of protein.

On the other hand, aren't acorns at very least pretty much unpalatable to humans?